Three Different Commissions; Three Different Views from the Community

Today I ran my own commentary on why that is not the best approach, and I argue that it does not get at the real budget problem. Also, what we really need to do is encourage more activist commissioners, who are not beholden to a specific political agenda. And we can restructure the system, as we should have done this spring and failed to do so properly.

But please read on. I think we have a problem, and I would like your support to address it.

Namely, we need to keep the Davis Human Relations Commission.

One of the great things about Davis is that most of its citizens agree we should stand together against social, ethnic, racial and religious discrimination, harassment, and attacks, whether from officialdom or between citizens, in groups or individually. We know that Davis is not immune from the social friction at large in the state and nation.

Those on this list do not need to be reminded of the various times the Davis community has come together to defend victims, sustain communication and protect civil liberties. We have stood together against racial profiling by the police, the arson at Hillel House and ethnic trouble at the high school, and against vandalism and hate directed against our neighbors. Our vigilance must now extend to our Muslim friends.  

We do have private mediation, school counselors, churches, and other places attempting to maintain good will, and there are some preventive efforts by the police.  These are all good and well-meaning efforts, but they are piecemeal. They lack a specific focus on responding to threats or actual incidents affecting individuals or groups, and they have not been charged with educating the community. 

We are fortunate to have an official Human Relations Commission. It indeed has such a focus, it is indeed charged with this responsibility. It has been politically buffeted at times, which comes with the territory. But the need for it remains high. It offers an official forum other than the time-strapped City Council to consider, in depth, the sources and potential of social friction. It can hear grievances and mediate disputes.  The Council should be glad it exists.

Two or three years ago, there was an effort to trim the size and number of the City’s commissions and “reconcile” their terms with the City Council.  Fortunately, the Human Relations Commission was retained, with police oversight shifted to a Community Advisory Board and the creation of a police ombudsman.

Due to a tough budget situation, the idea of eliminating or merging commissions is back. On Tuesday evening the Council will again look at the idea of merging Human Relations into the Social Services Commission. 

The Social Services Commission considers the well being of underprivileged or vulnerable folks in the community, and annually recommends the allocation of federal grant money to nonprofit groups trying to aid these persons.

This job is not about civil liberties, discrimination, or any of the things I have cited above. That is the job of the Human Relations Commission.

To attempt to have Social Services address these things is to dilute the City’s and the community’s capabilities in this area. It is a mistake.

Please come and give your opinion about this to the Council.

Tuesday night, September 21, 6:30 pm.

Ken Wagstaff is the former Mayor of Davis

This ultimately would reduce the number of people participating in local governance by 49, severely reducing citizen oversight.

This move will not save money, because city staff are not paid extra for commission liaison duties. Saylor and Swanson admit ‘”at this stage, exact savings are difficult to determine – rather than simply focus on ‘how much’ a commission costs, the subcommittee also focused on whether each particular commission fit into the core goals.”

Saylor and Swanson are pushing to make this monumental change to reduce public participation with minimal public input in one evening: “With new appointments pending in the next few weeks, this is the best window of opportunity to restructure commissions …”

The blatant threat to hold up commission appointments if a “merger” is not approved was used before in an effort to eliminate the Senior Citizens Commission. Saylor and Swanson are threatening: “Missing this window and postponing action on the above recommendations translates to potential postponement of commission appointments.”

Former Mayor Ruth Asmundson directed from the dais that the issue of merging the Senior Citizens and Social Services Commissions not be considered again. Yet here we are, three years later, revisiting this issue.

Eliminating/merging the Senior Citizens and the Social Services commissions would violate the Americans with Disabilities Act. Seniors cannot meet at night, when all other commissions meet to accommodate those who work during the day. Seniors will be illegally shut out of participating in the commission process. In one weekend, 138 angry seniors signed a petition to save their commission.

Had not the Senior Citizens Commission existed, Davis would not have developed two senior car safety DVDs in partnership with the CHP, a transportation safety expo and senior housing guidelines. Nor would Davis have the Carlton Plaza Davis assisted living facility.

Commissioners serve at the pleasure of the City Council, which serves at the pleasure of the Davis voters. Saylor and Swanson would do well to remember that.

Elaine Roberts Musser is the Chair of the Senior Citizens Commission

I am writing to encourage you to retain the Tree Commission during the proposed commission consolidation effort. As outlined in the city memo, the Tree Commission would be combined with the  Natural Resources and the Open Space and Habitat Commissions. Though the proposed changes are intended to be a cost-saving measure, this move could actually result in the loss of revenue for the city.

The tree commission was established 32 years ago to preserve, protect, and expand the Davis urban forest. It has a very specific function and relies on the expertise of one city staffer and volunteer Commissioners to monitor the health of city trees. Because of the city’s efforts, the City of Davis has received a growth award from the Arbor Foundation for the fourth year in a row. The city staff and Commission volunteers are invested in working towards the sterling designation, which is given after ten years of consecutive growth awards.

Because we have a tree commission, Davis is eligible for grant funding and was awarded $65,000 to conduct a park tree inventory. This is valuable revenue for the city and our eligibility for such funding may be lost without a designated tree commission. Combining the tree commission with the Natural Resources Commission and the Open Space Commission will not eliminate the need for careful monitoring of our trees. The money received through grant funding easily outweighs the low cost of $6,600/year to run this commission. Most importantly, the health of the urban forest supports the economic and social health of our community by raising home values and the quality of life of Davis residents.

Please re-consider the proposed consolidation of the Tree Commission. We, the Tree Commissioners, believe it is important that the Tree Commission remain a stand-alone Commission and are happy to continue serving the city in this capacity.

Best regards,
Rainbow Vogt, Tree Commissioner since 2009